Hi, On 2023-02-13 14:56:47 -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 04:37:10PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > + basic_archive_context = data->context; > > + if (CurrentMemoryContext == basic_archive_context) > > + MemoryContextSwitchTo(TopMemoryContext); > > + > > + if (MemoryContextIsValid(basic_archive_context)) > > + MemoryContextDelete(basic_archive_context); > > > > This is a bit confusing, because it means that we enter in the > > shutdown callback with one context, but exit it under > > TopMemoryContext. Are you sure that this will be OK when there could > > be multiple callbacks piled up with before_shmem_exit()? shmem_exit() > > has nothing specific to memory contexts. > > Well, we can't free the memory context while we are in it, so we have to > switch to another one. I agree that this is a bit confusing, though.
Why would we be in that memory context? I'd just add an assert documenting we're not. > On second thought, I'm not sure it's important to make sure the state is > freed in the shutdown callback. It's only called just before the archiver > process exits, so we're not really at risk of leaking anything. I suppose > we might not always restart the archiver in this case, but I also don't > anticipate that behavior changing in the near future. I think this > callback is more useful for things like shutting down background workers. I think it's crucial. Otherwise we're just ossifying the design that there's just one archive module active at a time. > I went ahead and removed the shutdown callback from basic_archive and the > note about leaking from the documentation. -1 Greetings, Andres Freund
